Abstract
Connor (1996, 1997) claims that the origin of early contrastive rhetoric lies in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity. This article argues that her claim does not appear tenable. The Sapir-Whorf view of language as a causal determination is not compatible with Kaplan's (1966) position that rhetoric is evolved out of a culture. Furthermore, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is actually rooted in German ideas which also conflict with Kaplan's view. On the other hand, Hymes’ethnography of communication approach can be seen as an important historical antecedent for contrastive rhetoric. Kaplan's view appears to reinforce Hymes’position that it is culture rather than the linguistic form which is the frame of reference for the use of language.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
